About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 22 of about 23
why now? i want to share a few things. one is that once we start implementing the law and the mechanisms started falling in place and in the first year we got 1,000 cases nudged and then results. .. the mechanism is one thing. the greeting that oxygen, the way we can breed of the greeting as space for rigging a plan and not be bastrop away. women who complain, stigma and retaliation. that is the part that probably would need to focus on. the other thing i felt was that it was really a universal issue. i, during my struggle in the last ten years, have probably read about every sexual-harassment case. and every country, i went to japan a month ago and there it was everywhere in the public place and offices. so i felt like this is something that we really need to a not divide up the world, and this is the part where women have problems and this is a part of the world that has the outcome. we will need to develop a bond of solidarity. when need to talk about our struggles. countries like pakistan, one case of a gang rape or something happens and then it goes into the media
. >> good evening. i'm the director of the yale law library and i'm here to welcome you to the library booktalk sister i want to thank the founders society for cosponsoring tonight's talk. tonight's program features logan beirne who is the author of a new book on america's first chief executive entitled "blood of tyrants: george washington and the forging of the presidency." this is very much a yale law school block. it began as a paper while logan was a law school student. the paper was written -- after graduation from law school in 2008 and working two years in a law firm, logan returned to yale law school in 2010 as a scholar and began turning the paper into the book that we feature tonight. appropriate laid we have the professor with those to comment on the book. professor is a highly distinguished member of the yale law school factoid. is the author of numerous books, monographs and articles, and several of his books have been featured in previous book club series sponsored by our library. according to a recently published study by my colleague, fred sugar, professor eskridge is
--from personal grievance to public law". the book describes what happened when 11 women joined the campaign to go into the un only to be attacked by there un managers. the case culminated in legislation by the pakistani parliament in 2000 that make sexual harassment crime. she is the chair person, and human rights and democracy streaming and research on news activism and environment. and based in washington d.c. at the national endowment for democracy. and over red light areas, released by oxford and forgotten cases. and in japanese have become popular among young pakistani women. and the doctorate working at the university of minnesota. please join in welcoming today's guest dr. fouzia saeed. [applause] >> very nice to be here and i look forward to the next hour of engagement with you. if you want to turn this off you can, at least up to the limit. i am going to tell you a story today and the stories in the context of pakistan, about one woman and also celebration of women in pakistan but it resonates universally, goes across borders. this is about a legislation we got in pakistan against sexual
to the logs and find out? to because they gather one. @booktv gather every one of the law books, all the organ's locks and everything to do with these are plants that night get shipped over to the command ship where there are meeting to cover up the story . they did away with it. that's why you haven't. and, in fact, to put the fear of god and the people who kept copies because they felt guilty, one of the chiefs actually kept a copy of what the fire that night, whenever. he would not turn it over because he still is so afraid of what might happen to him if he turns it over and if i were to get your someone were to get in and talk about it. as long as you d'tell anybody who they are taught all of this led turns out he was never notified. i went to see him. he was a reservist and. he lived in virginia. i drove out there to see him and talk to him and show them what i had. he slammed his fist down on the table and says, i have sas teams here and here and here. we put people in here. the helicopter ser. you know, so they could get to these guys of the went down because they expected a lot more of
process of the law and end up killing more people than the so-called bad guys. >> ambassador akbar ahmed is a professor of studies. american university for noesseni fellow with the brookings institution, a viti professor formerly served as pakistan high customer to the u.k. and the author of several books. professor come on you the member of a tribe from your country as pakistan? >> guest: >> that is an interesting question. i have a question as an anthropologist it is critical to put out there for the reader so everyone knows. my mother is a baton, my father goes back to the profit in islam and i've always found the two are very interesting in my makeup comes along the one hand there is the person who would want peace and create good will and bring people together and compassion more thoughtful and even more mystical. and sometimes these are conflict and i see this in me. so i found that when i was doing the study i was able to get under the skin of the tribal people because that is also part of my heritage but i could reach beyond that and transcend that to reach out and find ways of b
federal laws about desecrating national parks. and something else which was startling to me at first. i did not know what the grapes for trying to tell me a first. and what i realized and will allow the people who come and go up to the top of cadillac mountain and look out over what is essentially a big spruce forest did not realize is that the grapes were there before the spruce forest. and if you go back to the history, you find that. by about the year 1880, more than half of the island had been deforested. and along the edges any place that could grow hay or any kind of crops in the short growing season was used to create food for draft animals and food for people. and i realized that there were some enormous changes in the land that had not really thought about. and then i happened to stumble upon william cronin's book by the same name, changes in the land. when i came back from asia in the 80's i went back to michigan, where i grew up. i -- having this in mind, i saw these enormous changes in the landscape or grow. it was full of small family flowers in those days but no in the 80'
'm actually concerned about that. [inaudible] just something broke yesterday. john kerry's son-in-law, which didn't come out in the vetting process, his son-in-law is an iranian. and iranian americans with very close world is in iran. and that is, it's a breakdown of the vetting process. and so i will ask you all, are you concerned about this? >> i would have to know more about the iranians. most iranian americans of course our strong opponents of every regime i don't know about this person. >> [inaudible] >> this could be a problem, to come in terms of pressure and blackmail. i would be concerned about that, you know. i would say if the state department is now aware of that fact, they may be able to take steps to protect him in some way or put him in some of the portfolio. but i don't know about the situation. >> since we are losing some media coverage, i just want to reiterate that there's a book called "persecuted: the global assault on christians." three of the three authors are here on this panel. we are grateful for your time. also, new website, persecutionreport.org. please don't neg
issued a proclamation which declared in effect marshall law for the county of princes and, required all of this history wear red ribbons to show their loyalty for the mother company. the first house of worship actually was the old courthouse building, but that was acquired in the 1820s, and it served for almost 100 years a. across the street from us is a church which was organized in 1843, portion of the old sanctuary survived a 1940s fire, and, therefore, it is the oldest house of worship here in this area. the city of virginia beach as we noted consist of 310 square miles until relatively recently, very rural, in the beginning of the wicked are only 19,000 people in all of the modern city of 440,000. and so the historic buildings that we have going back to hundred, 250, 300 years are really very scattered. today, virginia beach is known to many people because of the resort and the oceanfront. that was impossible really in the 1880s when the rail line was constructed from norfolk to the oceanfront. there are several buildings at the oceanfront which reflect the early years of the virgi
don't have to pay, and diplomatic protections for the egregious violations of law. you can't take it to criminal court, but to the table to negotiate with those who tell you we're the only people, we, the jewish people, with rights in this land. these cold, hard realities of how u.s. policy grievancely harms palestinians are screened from the u.s. public. we bombarded, especially on television, instead, with dishonest rhetoric what is described as progress in a so-called peace process which extensively consistented of negotiations between near equals under the impartial gays of an honest american broker, all supposedly intended to create an independent palestinian state. i'm arguing that this is not what is actually happening. this is not what has happened for 35 years. what has happened is the continuation and the intensification and the reenforcement of the dispersal of the organization and colonization of the pal stippian people and their homeland. the united states, in fact, has never really operated as an honest broker between the palestinians and israel. i never talked to an
. the first house vacant at the double what was a mother-in-law house. it was not inhabited. the person was away at the time and the flier mailed it. house was destroyed by the fire. and they got down to the compound, and began to do triage your getting things moved away from that blue house and the blue double wide so they wouldn't catch fire, putting a sprinkle on top of the house to give yourself a little edge. and this is what was coming. and one of the things that the captains, richard gerhart and freddie espinoza agreed upon is they would do a burnout. they would start a fire and run into the main fire. now, this is one of the most combustible places on the plan planet. and they couldn't get the backfire started. they hav had their trip george d they're trying to get it going. people see what was left of the original attempt at the backfire in just a second. but this caused some degree of anxiety. you have this thing pouring down on you and your want to run it by right into and if are you trying to start, and here's the guy trying to start it. isn't taking. it should just take off
the audience. please wait until you get a microphone before u.s. to because of laws we will pick you up on camera. u.s. a question? down here in front. you have to wait for the microphone. and copley's to do as a favor. not accusing you, don't make a speech. as the question. >> my question is whether their is a real parallel between the argument for abolishing slavery and the argument for abolishing war. >> sounds like that's yours. >> the question is, is there real parallel? i don't know. the point that i was trying to make was i think every generation does seven things and italy. we do things that make us more -- morally queasy, but we think we have to do them. i would say that for our generation as for pretty much every generation before us, war is one of those things. again, ask for a show of hands. how many people think the war is a good thing and have many people think that war should never be used as a policy? >> we are then obviously all conflicted. i think if you look back on previous generations, to think that we can't morally understand how honest, sincere people could believ
, under secretary norman went in and froze the the 1981 bill that became law, that the reagan tax cut we are talking about earlier so it was a practical handle. the neat thing that you recount again five years later it didn't make a difference. four or five years later by 1984 there were 40 other organizations doing knockoffs of what the mandate for leadership had been. >> when i interviewed the president of other think tanks in washington d.c. brookings and c s i s and kato, i said what difference has the heritage approach to research made? all the difference in the world. the brookings president said we now do what heritage first started so heritage really, and i say that in the book, change the think tank culture of washington d.c.. >> one of the neatest things that i can say among all of you, 25, 30 years ago when phil and i were just getting our feet wet at heritage there weren't 600 people in the united states who knew what a think tank was. 600,000 people have voluntarily supported us. that is incredible. incredible impact. >> glad you mentioned that because there is no other thin
rush. one came from massachusetts, from harvard and yale law school. so was an odd mix. one was a politician, businessman, double dealer, self-promoter, who became the first superintendent of yellowstone national park. the sent one, whose father had followed the gold rush, was a soldier, a humble cavalry lieutenant who is also a self-taught scientist, brilliant man, phenomenal writer, who wrote the first great account of the exploration of yellow stone in 1870 that was haled at the time by the leading scientist office the day as the greates writings sip lewis and clark, and the third was the harvard and yale law school bookish hype ocon dry yack scholar, who became like men in the west, driven by fear, for a of the others he walked from independence, iowa to the montana gold rush. acted the politician and future superintendent, and like a lot of white men who settled there, he became an exterminationist. i think about the conversation in the earlier panel about the problem for historians out presentism. how you impose the moral assumptions and values of the present on the re
and actually really happy to see how quickly law enforcement got on top of it and hold pulled it together so incredibly quickly and got the people apprehended them and they were captured in a matter of days. that actually made me feel so much more secure and so much better and i was really applauding the fbi and all the police that were working together and how everybody seemed to be reacting differently to those then 9/11. there was less feared and more rallying and they were not going to let them do this. on the other hand as my job i was watching the friends ask in the technology that they were using and i was fascinated. the infrared helicopters that they could watch the motions of the guy in the boat the fact that there was let in a sabha campus moving. i need to pick those things up for my writing and i know that sounds horrible but i'm listening as a human being and listening as a writer. i couldn't help the reality is that i thought it was fascinating and horrifying. >> having spent a number of years writing about a manhunt, i also found the tactics of this manhunt quite interesting.
in cleveland working for a law firm, and this next call comes from bobby in ohio. >> caller: i've got a question for you in regards to the comment you made about rg 3:and the article about him being called an uncle tom. why would you state that person saying that would be republican? wouldn't democrats actually sometimes have feelings like that? i'm a republican, and i don't feel that way towards rg iii, so i'm just curious why you would say that. >> guest: you either misunderstood what i said, or i said it badly. what i said was the espn guy criticized rg iii because he thought he was republican. he said there's a rumor he's republican, i don't know about that. he's got a white fiancee, i don't know about that. he called him a cornball brother because he suspected that rg iii was a republican, but he had a white fiancee. that is why this caster called him a cornball brother which i think is a racist thing. so i'm sorry if i misexplained it. >> host: go ahead, bobby, you're still on the line. >> caller: i appreciate that. i agree the same way you do then. i think it's totally a racist
by will you -- must include the contributions of the transgendered? by law. you will have to have pages on transgendered contributions. people who were crossed over sex, or dressed in the other sex. clothing. isn't that absurd? isn't that totalitarian? i thought the purpose of the textbook was to tell the truth, not make groups feel good. but as i point out in the book, leftism is overwhelmingly rooted in feelings. >> host: dennis prager is the author. "still the best hope" is the name of his recent best seller. louis from florida, you're on the air. you're talking with dennis prager. >> caller: i'd like to ask mr. prayinger and his ilk what he just said about truth, why should people believe the bible when that's the biggest novel ever written? who believes the earth is 5,000 years old? how can you follow a book that tells you the world is 5,000 years old and hisclass commentary about the christian schools and the seminary, how does he say something like that and he wants to be honest? i know this man is a right winger, and he wouldn't fifth credit to anybody, but my main question is,
both would have to sign before to become law. they would have to agree on executive order, sipri court nominees, decisions as commander-in-chief of the military. each would have their own vice president for a small personal staff but all other appointments the executive branch or the judiciary would be a single joint appointee. with that they could make decisions so much more quickly. you sort of have a democrat nominating a democratic person or republican for republican. you would have a bipartisan nominee and there wouldn't be a confirmation in the position will be filled much more quick way. in all likelihood they would divide up primary responsibilities. one might direct health care and the other education. one might focus on our relations with european countries and the other with asian countries but when it would come time to make decisions they would have to agree. all decisions would have to be shared decisions. joint decision would make it more representative decision-making. instead of having a republican president champing the platform of the republican party or a democratic
of a bank account or something, you know. if you think unilaterally the dictator for a day passed one law, what would you do? that's definitely a major flaw in the republican thinking. they assume we're going to be dictator for one day and limit government by doing that. in fact we're dictators for life and government gets bigger. to get to the spirit of your question, i think if we could reverse or somewhat change the relationship between the federal government and the states, i think that is the most lasting thing to serve to limit government. the vision of competing multiple jurisdiction of preventing consolidation of power is valid and valid in this century as well. the senates go hat and hand in washington asking for federal money. >> hi, spencer with the "daily caller" you reference the mythical permanent majority of the republican party. of course they disappeared. now we see a vision the establishment fading way. tea party segment is rising. do you think that is a permanent influence on the modern republican party now? if so give that is a grassroots movement is there anything you
that information, they will gather it whether or not you're aware of it. but all we're doing is permitting our law enforcement officers from having, you know, the tools to go after people who are getting guns illegally, buying them at gun shows and things like that. so one of the things we have to be careful about is that these inauthentic arguments sort of spread through the media, and they spread -- you know, one of the things i talk about in the book is that the fragmentation of media gives consumers more power than ever. you may not feel that way, but you have more power now than media consumers have ever had in history because you can choose where you're going to see something, when you're going to see something, and the technology exists to tabulate that. if you go to a web site, if you go to youtube, if you go to hulu, here or there, people will see that, and can they will know. ten years ago if you weren't in the nielsen family, nobody knew whether or not you were. watching television, and they didn't care. now there are a bunch of different ways for you to express your opinion about what'
no to a trajectory but what do you think? should we have limits to how much we spend? the health care reform law has proposed the independent advisory board to be set up with 15 minutes and they would recommend ways to curb spending based on realignment and closure commission remember we had to close military bases is very hard for elected officials to make those decisions to close the military base for their own constituencies of a seated that responsibility to experts in congress had to agree or disagree. palace the model used for the independent payment advisory board. cannot change medicare eligibility raise premiums are cut benefits and if congress doesn't like any recommendations it doesn't have to agree with any of them but it would have to come up to find equivalent savings of its own. it was repealed in the u.s. house of representatives claims that the doctor patient relationship is that what the opposition was about? the interest of patients for not being able to seek continuing revenue? proposed in "medicare meltdown" the real reason is the desire to move -- removed any impediments for wh
an ngo if it runs afoul of laws on foreign money. i think the main thing would be what does the organization itself want? the democracy and human rights activist in egypt was company on this a year or two back and said, ask of the organization. it's probably the best judge of its own risks and what it needs. so that's all i can suggest on that. >> i'm with the investigative project on terrorism to our organization tracks domestic islamists that are filled with the rugged such as the council -- islamic society of north america and we've been able to see if there's been a close correlation between these groups and lobbying the obama administration. it come out and support the brotherhood in egypt and elsewhere in the middle east. do you think that they are having an impact on how the administration deals with indigenous christians in the muslim world? >> quick canvass. we would have no idea on, you know, what are the dynamics, just observe the phenomenon, the current administration, with the bush administration as far as are doing with iraq did not raise this issue, did not fo
of law, but this is the last one i read and then move it to q&a. it is simply live with the book but i hope to get out of it. the purpose of this book is twofold. to familiarize the american public and decision-makers, specifically the senior war college and to encourage discussion on how to improve the education of their important missions. the latter sense of the idea that there's room for improvement. cocos must be clear. whether war college goals are clear and whether articulated goals are supported by practices and processes that these institutions as part of the discussion. admiral james stafford is provided to think or take a nation of busy of for college education goes up to 2011 national war college convocation by describing this situation when he arrived at national in 1991. quote, i knew it i was good at and what i do well, driving a destroyer or crusader, leading a boarding party with a surrogate mother, landed in an air defense. beating sailors on the deck leadership, but fails to sense what i did not know or understand well. global politics and grand strategy, importance
human rationality. people do all kinds of really stupid things. we enact stupid laws sometimes that a lot of people agree on more because certain interest groups influence others. look at the gun legislation. yeah it's for the failure to enact it is driven by the economic interest of a certain small bunch of businesses but is that really why a huge number of other individuals who believe that's a good thing to do or wildly misinterpret the second amendment because they feel it within themselves. with regard to slavery and you jumped off from that, one of the things that became and has become clear to me the more i have delved into the world of the slave owner it's self and indeed the pre-emancipation north where it wasn't really all that different, is that a lot of people really liked slavery. they liked it. yes it was profitable but it wasn't always all that profitable and a motivator particularly in the 19th century was much of the south it was up into the respectable middle class to own a slave. it gave you a status in the stature that you might not have otherwise so why did
Search Results 0 to 22 of about 23

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)